OrthodoxWiki:Trapeza/Archive 5

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
m (New page: == Uncategorized Images == Hello, I was wondering why in the uncategorized picture section of OrthodoxWiki there is pictures of the Pope? He does not relate to the studies or teaching o...)
 
m
Line 1: Line 1:
 
+
'''This is an archive of past discussions. Please use the [[OrthodoxWiki:Trapeza|main Trapeza page]] to resurrect any of these topics.'''
 
+
----
 +
{{TOC}}
 
== Uncategorized Images ==
 
== Uncategorized Images ==
  

Revision as of 04:29, November 25, 2008

This is an archive of past discussions. Please use the main Trapeza page to resurrect any of these topics.


Template:TOC

Contents

Uncategorized Images

Hello, I was wondering why in the uncategorized picture section of OrthodoxWiki there is pictures of the Pope? He does not relate to the studies or teaching of Orthodoxy ( At least not to my knowledge ). I know that there have been talks to try and create a greater friendship with the catholics and the Pope. But I still do not think there should be a picture of him on a Orthodox site. I am only 18 and I'm still trying to understand my religion more and I think people might get the wrong impression if they see the Pope on the OrthodoxWiki site. Am I wrong to ask this? Because on a earlier post I noticed that Dcn. Andrew said "OrthodoxWiki is dedicated to Orthodox Christianity." Thanks.

P.S. This is a great website and I learn a lot from it.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by OrlandoOrthodox (talkcontribs) .

Although the Orthodox and Caholic churches are not in full Communion, there is often movement,in that direction. The biggest obstacle, to that happening is, antipapal feeling, coming from the radical wing of the Orthodox Church. This has been going on for decades. It's time to come together, and love one another, for all times.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Deacongene (talkcontribs) .

When does a hierarch begin his tenure?

According to the canons of the Orthodox Church, at which point does a hierarch ascend his cathedra? That is, if he is elected by the flock of his diocese/metropolia/autonomous Church (where such elections are provided for) is he already considered to occupy his see? Or, will he assume his post only after his election is confirmed by the hierarchal superiors? Or esle, will he do so only after the enthronement ceremony (where such is provided for)? In different lists of hierarchs I have seen different dates marking the beginning of their tenure.

I thank You for Your attention and ask, if possible, to advise Church texts to confirm this point. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by INK (talkcontribs) .

terminology

The term "Oriental Orthodox" is problematic, since it seems like a euphemism designed to avoid the term "Monophysite." The word "Oriental" really means "Eastern" so the term does not really distinguish the two sides of the debate. Also, the use of the word "Orthodox" implies an acceptance of the Orthodoxy of the non-Chalcedonians, which has still not been agreed upon by a consensus within the (Chalcedonian) Orthodox Church. I know that the term "Monophysite" is considered offensive by the non-Chalcedonians. Unfortunately the term "Miaphysite," coined by some to replace it, is a neologism that just doesn't work in the original Greek (would "miagamous" do as a replacement for "monogamous"?) and, in my opinion, serves to obscure the real ground of difference that still seems to separate the two sides. Since OrthodoxWiki is supposed to have a "mainstream Chalcedonian bias," wouldn't the terms "Chalcedonian" and "non-Chalcedonian" or "anti-Chalcedonian" be more appropriate? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mariner (talkcontribs) .

Hi Mariner, please sign you posts with three tildes, so we can know who is talking - thanks.
In my understanding, the term "monophysite" is not just offensive, it's inaccurate."Anti-Chalcedonian" may be correct as a historical reference, but perhaps not as a theological descriptor. "Non-Chalcedonian" would probably be the preferred term in my mind. "Oriental Orthodox" is generally understood, and does not, I think, cause much confusion. It also seems to be the preferred self-designation of the non-Chalcedonian groups. I don't have a problem granting them that name here. I do not think we need to go heresy hunting. Let us set forth our Chalcedonian understanding of Christology. If they can accept what we mean by this (and WHOM we mean by this), I think we are well on the way towards reunion. We may grant that language issues and imperial politics had a role to play in the division.
If you could document statements by non-Chalcedonian bishops and theologians who would consider Chalcedonian Christology heretical, I think we'd have more to go on in our conversation (and perhaps some of the non-Chalcedonian folks would like to chime in too). — FrJohn (talk)

Why I am Orthodox

I made a page when anyone can write some phrases to show why he is Orthodox (what is for he more atractive in Orthodoxy), why he haven't chosen an other belief (what aspects that he didn't like it has and it is absent in our religion), or, simply, some beautiful thought from his soul, concerning the Orthodoxy.

The advantage of this page is that there is not needing to wait a special state to write an article. Becouse each of us have such thought in mind and we have only to insert them here. This requires only a few minutes (If we have more complex thought, we are creating our new page!)

So, the page could become an ode to Orthodoxy, poem in which anyone can contribute and find something good for his soul.

At the end of page there are useful links that points to sites that promotes the Orthodoxy values.

The page is named Why I am Orthodox... And not Protestant, Catholic, Budist, etc. Live Apologetics

Mircea Romania 02:46, February 19, 2007 (PST)

That is an interesting idea, but OrthodoxWiki is an encyclopedia, and these recent new articles are not really encyclopedic. Perhaps they might better be hosted elsewhere. —Fr. Andrew talk contribs 15:36, February 19, 2007 (PST)
Mircea, I would recommend checking out the forums section in the Online Orthodox Communities link here and trying your idea there. Besides the fact that the aim of this site is to be an Orthodox encyclopedia, you'd probbably get a much better response at an active forum. Honestly, the same few people tend to contribute a lot of the material here. Gabriela 19:04, February 19, 2007 (PST)
Individual users may post things like this (within reason) on their user pages. I've moved the article there. — FrJohn (talk)

denominative aspects of Eucharist

Since Intercommunion is a central--for my point of view, the central--matter in (inter-)christian dialogue--since Eucharist is the heart of Ecclesiology, of our self-awareness as members of Christ's body; and since this site is a place not only for Orthodoxes who live among other fellow Christians, but also for they among them who strive to understand our distinctive character, i think it would be of great significance if the article dedicated to Eucharist was enriched with a section where the other Christian denomination's Theology and Practice about Eucharist will be presented. Of course that is not possible to be in a detailed and systematic manner, but it could be, at least, focused on the rationale we Orthodox deny Intercommunion with them though we do not deny other communication-relation in love with them.

Vassilip

Question: Autonomous Ukrainian Orthodox Church and Alexandrian Exarchate in the USA?

Does anyone have any information about an Autonomous Ukrainian jursidiction that was recognized as an exarchate of the Patriarchate of Alexandria sometime in the 1980's? Any information would be appreciated. ---Leonidas


Picture

Could someone explain me how to post picture in article. I hope that tomorow I will have Icon of Saint Sava of Serbia. ---Ddpbf

A question about a prayer in the original Greek

I am doing some research in Church history, investigating the validity of the technique of "historical criticism" using linguistics. :I am in the Byzantine Catholic Church. :My question involves the Stichera for the Office of Great Compline used, I believe, on December 31. It says, "The magi coming from the East adored God made man . . . they brought precious gifts: the purest gold as to the Eternal King." :My question is, Is the term "purest gold" used in the Greek? (Some critics say this is not a term used in the earliest ages of the Church.):Thank you for your kind attention. MaryKNH

You are referring to the third apostichon of the Great Vespers for December 31: Τοῦ Κυρίου Ἰησοῦ γεννηθέντος ἐν Βηθλεὲμ τῆς Ἰουδαίας, ἓξ Ἀνατολῶν ἐλθόντες Μάγοι, προσεκύνησαν Θεὸν ἐνανθρωπήσαντα καὶ τοὺς θησαυροὺς αὐτῶν προθύμως ἀνοίξαντες, δῶρα τίμια προσέφερον, δόκιμον χρυσόν, ὦς Βασιλεῖ τῶν αἰώνων, καὶ λίβανον, ὦς Θεῷ τῶν ὅλων, ὡς τριημέρω δὲ νεκρῶ, σμύρναν τῶ Ἀθανάτω, Πάντα τὰ ἔθνη, δεῦτε προσκυνήσωμεν, τῶ τεχθέντι σῶσαι τὰς ψυχὰς ἤμών. Your question is about the term δόκιμον χρυσόν. Your translation of "purest gold" isn't literally present in the Greek, where instead of καθαρότερον or καθαρότατον there is the positive adjective δόκιμον. Δόκιμον can be translated as "tested" or "tried" and in this context has the sense of "refined". Thus, "refined gold" is the best translation. Of course, refined gold is not that far removed from the "purest gold". Nevertheless, the English superlative adjective is not literally found in the Greek. I hope this helps. Leonidas

IW

Can someone of sysops look on sr.orthodoxwiki.org and try to make interwikis to work. Also this would be nice if someone will make Special:Statistic to work. All the best --Joca 04:01, March 27, 2007 (PDT)

Hi Joca, It's looking great over there already! I've fixed the interwiki links, and the error on the stats page should go away once someone actually registers a new account on that wiki - let me know if it doesn't! — FrJohn (talk)

rel="nofollow" for the links

Can rel="nofollow" be removed from the <a> tags in the articles? This feature is enabled in MediaWiki by default to discourage link spam and vandalism. I'm not sure it would be a problem for OrthodoxWiki. Hopefully not, because it requires registration in order to edit pages, and unlike wikipedia, I haven't seen a lot of vandalism here. Thank you! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Alexei Kojenov (talkcontribs) April 12, 2007.

I'm not sure rel=nofollow is even useful for that. What it does do is reduce Google rank. I vote for disabling rel=nofollow everywhere possible, so consider this a vote for disabling it on OrthodoxWiki. --Basil 09:55, April 20, 2007 (PDT)
Sorry for the delay on this. I agree (especially when we require login to edit), and I've disabled "nofolow" on all OrthodoxWiki sites. — FrJohn (talk)

Images from Wikimedia Commons

Do we have here some particular way to import images from Wikimedia Commons, or I must save first on my computer etc.? - Inistea 15:56, April 19, 2007 (PDT)

Fr. Julian, Sorry for the delay in getting back to you here. There are some automated import tools, but they're not worth the difficulty for smaller sets of images. For more extensive imports, check out the conversation at osource:OrthodoxSource:Photo_galleries and osource:OrthodoxSource:Images_for_Import. — FrJohn (talk)

Two subjects: Thank you, and A Correction

First, Thank you OrthodoxWiki for your wonderful article on St. Constantine the Great! I only wish you could have included the entire icon of him from the Hagia Sophia. Second, Thank you, Leonidas, for answering my question about a prayer in the original Greek. However, upon further checking I am sorry to say that I inadvertently misdirected you to the Compline for December 31. Please accept my sincere apologies for that. The actual prayer that I am inquiring about is in the Propers for Great Compline of the Nativity of Our Lord, God and Savior, Jesus Christ, the third "Aposticha" rendered in English as: "When the Lord Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea, the Magi, coming from the East, adored God made man, and unfolding their treasures, they brought precious gifts: the purest gold as to the eternal King. . . " My question was, "Is the term 'purest gold' found in the original Greek?" Thank you all, in advance, for any help you can offer. With sincere best wishes in Christ, Mary

edittools

I've created edittools for el.OrthodoxWiki, it might be usefull on en. or any other OrthodoxWiki. Ofcourse you can modify it accordingly in order to suit you special needs. On βελτίωση please add any template you have for article's improvement. --Kalogeropoulos 13:03, July 2, 2007 (PDT)

This looks like it would be potentially useful. For instance, adding Greek characters on the English-language version, and preferred diacriticals on the Romanian-language version are two ways I'd like to use this. Does anyone have a reason not to go ahead and use these? I will start playing around with some for en and ro here, and anyone who likes can come play, too, and/or offer comments on that talk page. —magda (talk) 15:11, February 28, 2008 (PST)

Russian "Old" Churches

I'm a bit confused about the status of at least three articles:

  • Russian Old-Orthodox Church
  • Russian Orthodox Old-Rite Church
  • Russian Orthodox Oldritualist Church

Do these represent different groups? Looking at the history of the Russian Old-Orthodox Church and Russian Orthodox Oldritualist Church, I can see that there must have been something ... but that has mysteriously disappeared. And the Russian Orthodox Old-Rite Church article, taken from Wikipedia, has an external link to the OrthodoxWiki article Russian Orthodox Oldritualist Church. Clarification? —magda (talk) 07:41, August 8, 2007 (PDT)

Magda, I don't know the story behind these articles, and I'm not an expert in this area. It seems to me they would all be "Old Believer" churches, though I suppose The ROCOR parish in Erie, PA is a former Old Believer church that now is part of the Chruch Abroad, but that continues to practice the old rite. There are also a number of different Old Believer groups -- I'm not sure how they are distinguished in terms of names. — FrJohn (talk)

Conversion

Not sure if this is the place for this, but here goes:

I have been wanting to convert to Eastern Orthdoxy for at least a year now. Eastern Orthodoxy to me seems to be the oldest church and probably the closest in nature to the original church of the apostles. The problem is that I have been brought up in a Unitarian/spiritualist home and lack knowledge of how to go about converting to Orthodoxy. If anyone here could help me I would be much obliged. --Gorig 02:34, August 25, 2007 (PDT)

Hi Gorig, Thanks for your note -- may God bless you on your journey! I'd recommend visiting around to your local Orthodox parishes. Find one where you feel comfortable and talk with the priest there. If you want to say where you're located, maybe we can help point you to a church. — FrJohn (talk) 10:18, August 25, 2007 (PDT)
Fr John's idea is definitely a good one; there's a list of parishes for every U.S. state on Orthowiki, so hopefully you can find one near you (or several, if you live in a large metropolitan area). But more specifically, if you're wondering what the actual conversion process consists of, it usually includes a series of catechism classes. How many and how long depends on your parish priest. When I began the process a couple years ago, for example, my priest held an after-Liturgy class two Sundays a month from October until April, when everyone in the group was baptized/chrismated (or bailed out at the last minute, in one or two cases). Each one lasted a little over an hour, and they covered basic theology, liturgics, a bit of ecclesiology, Orthodox spirituality, and lots of Church history. Of course, the detailed content depends on the priest, but you'll get the basics anywhere. Since you were brought up Unitarian, you'll probably need to be both baptized and chrismated, and a priest can tell you about doing so in due time. The best way to learn, though, is to go through a year of liturgical services, especially during Lent and Pascha. The Paschal service really is the best way to understand the heart of Orthodoxy—but you'll get there eventually(if you want, of course). Hope this helps. Gabriela 20:55, August 25, 2007 (PDT)
Thank you for your help. I live in Laguna Hills, CA, by the way. --Gorig 17:04, September 5, 2007 (PDT)


Toll-house theory

Who can tell me what is the content of this theory and the orthodox view of it. Arthasfleo 01:25, September 11, 2007 (PDT)

Not I, but it looks like there are some pages here to look into: On the Question of the "Toll-Houses" by Protopresbyter Michael Pomazansky. —magda (talk) 17:08, September 11, 2007 (PDT)
OK. Thank you - Arthasfleo 23:23, September 12, 2007 (PDT)

Formatting of "List of parishes in [state]" articles

As someone who occasionally uses the "List of parishes in [state]" pages to find a parish when I'm out of town, I wonder if we couldn't put forth a standard for formatting these pages to make it easier to find such information? I'm from St. Louis, MO, and I've formatted the Missouri page so that parishes in a given metro area are all grouped together, with large headers for the metro area, and small headers for the individual municipalities:

http://orthodoxwiki.org/List_of_parishes_in_Missouri_%28USA%29

In this way, if you're going to visit St. Louis, for instance, you'll easily find all ten parishes in the area, not just those located in the St. Louis city limits. Contrast this with, say, the Tennessee or Texas pages...

http://orthodoxwiki.org/List_of_parishes_in_Texas_%28USA%29
http://orthodoxwiki.org/List_of_parishes_in_Tennessee_%28USA%29

...where the font size difference between major cities and small municipalities is so small as to be barely noticeable.

Please see Category talk:Parish Directory (USA) for a discussion on standard formatting for these pages. —magda (talk) 15:29, October 31, 2007 (PDT)

Managua Orthodox parishes

Please help me locate the names, addresses, and contact info for Orthodox (preference is English-speaking) parishes/clergy in Managua, Nicaragua. Thank you. Ed Freeman, Miami Beach, Florida, USA. Edinmiami@yahoo.com.

November

OrthodoxWiki commemorations in November :

  • 2004 : english parent-project started
  • 2006 : romanian project started (650 articles today)

Long life to the project ! Chronia pola! Mnogaia Leta ! La Multi Ani ! --Inistea 06:12, November 14, 2007 (PST)

幾年も! Mnogaia leta! --Cat68 10:06, November 20, 2007 (PST)

Thanks for your post, Fr. Julian! It's a beautiful thing to me how Orthodox Christians from all over the world have come together to build these encyclopedias. — FrJohn (talk)

Bad Behavior

The "Bad Behavior" script was disabled by Fr John. So, welcome back and happy editing. --Inistea 10:44, December 7, 2007 (PST)

Good Samaritan reading?

Evrogite! I have a question which requires understanding of the church calendar(s): On what day of the year would the Parable of the Good Samaritan have been read in southern Siberia, a century ago? (Still the 25th Sunday after Pentecost? Which would have translated into what day of the year for them?) Thank you!Zla'od 00:12, January 4, 2008 (PST)

Missing Biblical Saints

[[1]] Wife of Pilate

[[2]] Longinus

[[3]] The poor Lazarus, if other than St Lazarus of Bethany

Feast days? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Hans (talkcontribs) .

I KNOW THESE! Just not off the top of my head. I can point you in the right direction for the wife of Pilate she is celebrated as one of the 7 Myrrh Bearing Women along with Mary Magdalene ... I have that Synaxaristi at home so I can not point you to her name ... or the date. However, if I can guess, they should be celebrated after Easter ... for sure! I will follow this up for you. I do not know much about Longinus but I am sure that their is a date we celebrate the poor Lazarus from the parable story ...again, this book is at home. Vasiliki Ixthis888 13:46, January 14, 2008 (PST)~

Real presence of the Body and Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ in the Eucharist

Greetings in the Name of the Lord, I have friends who have left the Orthodox Faith believing that Communion is only symbolic and not mystical. They teach that believing the bread and the wine become the body and blood of Christ is to re-crucify our Lord, which to them is an abominable heresy. My desire is to find where the Apostolic and Church Fathers teach or refer to the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist in their writings, especially those writing prior to the Great Schism. If anyone here can help me in this quest, please notify me by posting and by emailing me at jgfarmakis@fuse.net. Thank you and God Bless you.

Response by Vasiliki 23:15, February 22, 2008 (PST):

This miracle occured at Lanciano, Italy in the 8th century (300 years prior to the schisme between the Orthodox Body of Christ and the Catholic Church) ... So, this miracle occured within the Orthodox Body of Christ ... however, by rights of Geographic location it is the Catholic Church who retained the possession of the eucharist. They recently submitted the Eucharist for testing ...read the followinc excerpt:
Ancient Anxanum, the city of the Frentanese, has contained for over twelve centuries the first and greatest Eucharistic Miracle of the Church. This wondrous Event took place in the 8th century A.D. in the little Church of St. Legontian, as a divine response to a Basilian monk's doubt about Jesus' Real Presence in the Eucharist.
During Holy Mass, after the two-fold consecration, the host was changed into live Flesh and the wine was changed into live Blood, which coagulated into five globules, irregular and differing in shape and size. The Host-Flesh, as can be very distinctly observed today, has the same dimensions as the large host used today in the Latin church; it is light brown and appears rose-colored when lighted from the back. The Blood is coagulated and has an earthy color resembling the yellow of ochre.
Various ecclesiastical investigation ("Recognitions") were conducted since 1574.
In 1970-'71 and taken up again partly in 1981 there took place a scientific investigation by the most illustrious scientist Prof. Odoardo Linoli, eminent Professor in Anatomy and Pathological Histology and in Chemistry and Clinical Microscopy. He was assisted by Prof. Ruggero Bertelli of the University of Siena. The analyses were conducted with absolute and unquestionable scientific precision and they were documented with a series of microscopic photographs.
These analyses sustained the following conclusions:
  1. The Flesh is real Flesh. The Blood is real Blood.
  2. The Flesh and the Blood belong to the human species.
  3. The Flesh consists of the muscular tissue of the heart.
  4. In the Flesh we see present in section: the myocardium, the endocardium, the vagus nerve and also the left ventricle of the heart for the large thickness of the myocardium.
  5. The Flesh is a "HEART" complete in its essential structure.
  6. The Flesh and the Blood have the same blood-type: AB (Blood-type identical to that which Prof. Baima Bollone uncovered in the Holy Shroud of Turin).
  7. In the Blood there were found proteins in the same normal proportions (percentage-wise) as are found in the sero-proteic make-up of the fresh normal blood.
  8. In the Blood there were also found these minerals: chlorides, phosphorus, magnesium, potassium, sodium and calcium.
  9. The preservation of the Flesh and of the Blood, which were left in their natural state for twelve centuries and exposed to the action of atmospheric and biological agents, remains an extraordinary phenomenon;
I can only provide you with an article (google it for more information) that has some scientific basis to it, however, there are many tales of people who were passing by an Orthodox Church and happened to walk in out of curiousity (or whatever) and witnessed the priest 'slaughtering a baby'! To tell you of these stories would require much time and effort ... I hope that the miracle of Lanciano gives you some grounds to start a discussion. -- Vasiliki 23:14, February 22, 2008 (PST)
PS ... Let us not forget what St Ignatius of Antioch said. he said that, Holy Communion is the “Medicine of Immortality”. Our Lord Himself tells us that if we do not eat His Body and drink His Blood, we have no life in us (cf.John 6:53), and He also tells us that “Those who eat My Flesh and drink My Blood abide in Me, and I in them” (John 6:56). Our Lord invites us to be united with Him at every Divine Liturgy by receiving Holy Communion - His Body and Blood. -- Vasiliki 23:18, February 22, 2008 (PST)
Type AB (IV in the Russian system) is the most recent of the blood types, having appeared during the Mongol conquests (type B Asians conquering type A's). If the blood of Christ turns out to be AB, then we must conclude either that Christ miraculously changed his blood type, or that the Holy Spirit is a Mongol.Zla'od 10:28, April 11, 2008 (UTC)

Honestly, little of this has much of anything to do with Orthodoxy, which has always traditionally refrained from minute analyses of such things. What does Jesus' blood type have to do with our salvation? Also, whether the Roman Catholic church truly has the sacraments or not is a matter for some debate within Orthodoxy. In any event, it does not seem in keeping with piety to remove what's in the Chalice and to put it under a microscope! —Fr. Andrew talk contribs (THINK!) 11:27, April 11, 2008 (UTC)

If the blood tests had instead supported the icon's (or shroud's) authenticity, would you still have objected? Zla'od 00:05, April 19, 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I think that the point Father is trying to make, and this is the way Orthodox Christians tend to support their dogma, is that the real point of Christianity is not based upon science or mathematical proofs. What is important is the faith and the works ... he is also trying to stress that if one believes in God and also believes in the Holy Trinity, therefore Christ, why would you dishonour your own GOD by putting "Him" through scientific tests ... it is in a way extremally disrespectful to be 'testing' God ... its like subjecting your own family to medical tests its kind of not nice or right. Vasiliki 00:12, April 19, 2008 (UTC)
Yes, I would still object. —Fr. Andrew talk contribs (THINK!) 11:58, April 19, 2008 (UTC)

Gelasius I of Old Rome, Acacian Schism, Hormisdas

Gelasius I of Rome and Acacian schism are linked in red in timeline of Church History. That is, they are linked to non-existing articles. At the end of Acacian schism the peace was made with Hormisdas of Rome who is not even mentioned.

Catholic Encyclopedia attributes to Hormisdas having submitted to Greek bishops the formula acknowledging Roman supremacy. It was quoted by First Vatican Council.

Hans 07:27, March 11, 2008 (PDT)

American dates

Is there a reason to use American dates for non-English projects? Perhaps this is useful for wikis in English, but for the rest it's a bit confusing to have these strange date patterns. I would like to request to set for Bulgarian and Macedonian wiikis in the LocalSettings.php $wgAmericanDates = false;. Thank you. Cheers, Gregg 02:10, March 26, 2008 (PDT)

I'm not sure about the local settings thing, but it seems that each language has its own titles for calendar days, at least. So, for example, today:
  • el: 31 Μάρτιος
  • en: March 31
  • es: 31 de marzo
  • ro: 31 martie

Additionally, each user can set the date and time preferences for himself. Sorry if that doesn't address what you're talking about. —magda (talk) 11:38, March 31, 2008 (PDT)

No, this doesn't solve the problem, that's why I request this setting turned off. --Gregg 01:07, April 4, 2008 (PDT)
Hey, this is a really good point Gregg, and very helpful that you gave the name of the variable so I didn't have to look it up. I've changed all the wikis except EN to "$wgAmericanDates = false;" In the future, feel free to get my attention more quickly by leaving a note on my talk page about this stuff. - — FrJohn (talk) 01:45, April 4, 2008 (PDT)
Thank you, Gregg 12:45, April 4, 2008 (PDT)

St. Vlad's pages

Does anyone else have a problem getting to St. Vladimir's Orthodox Theological Seminary (Crestwood, New York)? I can get to the history, but not to any of the versions, nor to edit anything. When I try, I get the following error:

Fatal error: Call to undefined function wfStrencode() in /home/owiki/public_html/shared/extensions/ExternalRSS.php on line 206

magda (talk) 15:15, April 4, 2008 (PDT)

Magda, this is now fixed. — FrJohn (talk) 06:28, April 12, 2008 (UTC)

French localization (français)

The french localization is released. If you speak french, please come help the new-born site.
OrthodoxWiki en français a été lancé à l'eau. Si vous êtes francophone, n'hésitez pas de donner un coup de main. --Inistea 23:37, April 8, 2008 (UTC)

Canonical Church?

There is a small church in Astoria, NY called Holy Trinity. Does anyone know if it is canonical? I know that a priest comes from time to time from Greece. Cnaki 00:37, April 19, 2008 (UTC)

If you are referring to the Holy Trinity church located within the Borough of Queens, (from List of Parishes in New York article), then it is a ROCOR church, please visit the ROCOR article for more inforation about that church. Vasiliki 00:01, April 19, 2008 (UTC)
This church is on 20th Rd. between 38th and Steinway. Christine Cnaki 00:37, April 19, 2008 (UTC)
Hi Christine, I am not from America, so it would be hard for me to know such intimate information. I was making an educated guess that the church you are referring to is in Queens of New York. If this is true, then it is a ROCOR church and to discover more about the ROCOR church just click the link and read up on the article. It is Canonical I think since it is under the Russian arm ... however, whether they are bringing a canonical priest to visit the church is not for us to know. You need to ring your local Archdiocese to find out more information. I hope this helps somewhat unless someone else from OW can help you! Vasiliki 00:44, April 19, 2008 (UTC)
With regard to ROCOR, the basic answer is that yes, they are now (with the reunion with Moscow) considered canonical. (Before that, the waters were rather muddy, but most people recognized that they were something other than simply "uncanonical" by virtue of the historical circumstances. — FrJohn (talk) 03:39, May 21, 2008 (UTC)

Easter story

One Easter, a non-Orthodox visitor came to the Orthodox service.

The priest gave the customary greeting of "Christ has risen" (but in Greek or Russian or something), then waited for the customary response, "Christ has risen indeed."

Instead the visitor said,

"Oh, hi Father! HAPPY BUNNY DAY!!!"

(Try it out at your church, and see what happens!) Zla'od 00:13, April 19, 2008 (UTC)

UNESCO World Heritage Sites

I have done my best to pull together a list of some of these and link existing OW articles to this list and also add information to the articles pulling together UNESCO related religious sites/monuments but its far from complete and I would love assistance with this area. If anyone is interested in doing similar links with there country it would be great OR if you want to improve on the articles I've started or modified ... please HElp! Vasiliki 04:44, May 6, 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! Just to keep things focused, I've specified the article as List of Orthodox UNESCO World Heritage Sites and also adjusted the category accordingly. —Fr. Andrew talk contribs (THINK!) 11:47, May 6, 2008 (UTC)

Reliance on Wikipedia and "over-linking" to Wikipedia

I have noticed the increased reliance on linking to Wikipedia (example, Timeline of Church History) and especially when it comes to "External links", the first link seems to be off to a Wikipedia article. BNow, this is why I am bugged:

1. Wikipedia does not link back to OrthodoxWiki.

2. The Wikipedia frame of mind is NOT Chalcedonean and usually presents information in a "universal" bias (which has changed a lot since the introduction of the Internet! Consider the issue of "Macedonia" as a very good example of history being purposely changed to suit political agendas!) ...and especially when articles sit under an "Eastern Orthodox" series of articles but are not Eastern Orthodox in spirit .. this is especially sensitive when we are reviewing "historical" information presented in these articles, where the reliance is on "users" putting the information in, rather than cross checking our information against "Documented history" in our churches archives.

2. We seem to include too many times a cross reference to Wikipedia as our source under "External links" - I dont trust Wikipedia on many of the articles and it bugs me when it is used as a "authoritative" point of information, since we do not look to be coming across as well researched in our own articles rather that we are maybe "copying" another idea rather than presenting the Chalcedonean "fact"?

Does anyone else feel that we over rely on Wikipedia? Vasiliki 23:27, May 6, 2008 (UTC)

Vasiliki, there are a few things to say about this. We should not expect a reciprocal relationship to Wikipedia - they are much larger! - but also it's worth noting that there are a fair number of links back and mentions: http://www.powerset.com/explore/pset?q=orthodoxwiki
The difference between the "Wikipedia frame of mind" and OrthodoxWiki is, of course, why we started this wiki. I trust the readers to discern the differences.
Cross references serve a number of purposes. In many cases, OrthodoxWiki benefits a great deal from work people have done on Wikipedia, even using substantial content from Wikipedia to seed our own articles. We then tweak the articles to conform to our own Style Manual and NPOV. By the licensing terms, a link back is required. In other cases, we wish to reference a Wikipedia article which can provide additional background to an article, but which may not really belong here at all.
The best way to depend less on Wikipedia is to develop excellent original content on our wiki. Of course, this may then be used on Wikipedia, provided a link back is given.
Hope that helps! — FrJohn (talk) 03:37, May 21, 2008 (UTC)

Travel

I will be travelling between Sep-Oct to Greece and Turkey (hopefully Israel/Mt. Sinai but it appears I cant afford it at the moment). So, if you would like me to visit a specific religious monument and take a photo, please list it with a link to the relevant OW page (if it exists) and I will endeavour to factor this place in and upload the image to the page :-) Vasiliki 23:28, May 18, 2008 (UTC)

Please visit and take a photo for me :

  • Vasiliki, this is a great offer. Certainly many OrthodoxWiki articles could benefit from open-licensed photos of the holy and historic places. If you visit the Phanar, I remember the image of the Theotokos over one of the doors. I took a picture of it when I visited many years ago, and somehow I've lost it. I would love to see that again. Many thanks! Yours in Christ, — FrJohn (talk) 03:13, May 21, 2008 (UTC)
  • [Insert link]

HTML "width" attribute

I cant seem to find any help files to assist me in defining the width of columns. Vasiliki 04:15, May 22, 2008 (UTC)

Sin

Please make an article about sin. I could write it myself but I don't know the English terminology because I'm not English. -- Petru Dimitriu 18:00, May 24, 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism

Everything it's fine, now.--Θεόδωρος 14:01, June 10, 2008 (UTC)

Thanks to all who helped in the cleanup! —Fr. Andrew talk contribs (THINK!) 14:12, June 10, 2008 (UTC)

External links and OrthodoxSource

Hi, this is a suggestion!

As we start to create OrthodoxSource "OW sister pages" to list all the "Sources" relating to that particular topic, (Use Saint Athanasius of Alexandria as an example osource:Author:Athanasius of Alexandria and OW Athanasius of Alexandria) should we migrate the "External links" paragraphs into OS (since they are a list of Internet sources, I say YES and have done so in the example) and then remove the "External links" paragraph from the body of the OW article once the {{Osource }}tag is inserted. - Vasiliki 23:51, June 23, 2008 (UTC)

Hi Vasiliki - First, I apologize the the delay in responding earlier. I've just been going through a major move. I'm glad to see someone working on OrthodoxSource though. I've been neglecting it for too long! About your question, I guess we should talk about the vision for OrthodoxSource. I don't think we should move all of the External links or replicate the whole Nicene/Post-Nicene Fathers series on there, for example, because I'm seeing it more as a place for open-licensed primary source Orthodox-related materials that might be difficult to find (or at least in a unified form) in other places. I'd be interested to hear what others think on this, too. — FrJohn (talk) 00:33, June 24, 2008 (UTC)
If someone really wanted to work on developing comprehensive Bibliographies for authors, etc., I could see doing this there and then linking from the OWiki (Encylopedia) pages... — FrJohn (talk)

Hi, can you take a look at the three Pilot Articles and tell me what more you think:

Athanasius of Alexandria
Alexander Schmemann
John of Damascus

I agree, it is not necesssary to convert ALL the articles but at least for the ones that DO have an OSource article, at least I think, it is appropriate to remove the "External links" category since it would be a doubling of information ...also, i wanted to ask you what is a open-licensed primary source? Before I go toooooooo far on OSource, have you looked at the site? Do you like what I have done? - Vasiliki 00:42, June 24, 2008 (UTC)

I don't particularly like the look of the new articles. There is a heading with basically nothing under it except the Template:Osource. I think the external links, etc., should remain on the OWiki articles. I think OSource should be used primarily for primary-source articles, i.e., if I wrote an original article about St. John of Damascus or his theology, I could put it on OrthodoxSource. Other sources on the internet would just be external links unless we have permission to use them, so I think they should remain external links on OWiki. Just using OSource to list external links (like this page) seems completely redundant to the OWiki project. (Not to say it's bad work, just excessive.) As a side note, I have not been able to get OSource to work with OCommons in terms of hosting images via interwiki. —magda (talk) 01:01, June 24, 2008 (UTC)
I'm not in favor of any migration of OrthodoxWiki material to OrthodoxSource, unless it already doesn't belong on OW and would qualify for inclusion on OS. OW should keep its full functionality without users having to click over to find something that used to be here. —Fr. Andrew talk contribs (THINK!) 01:52, June 24, 2008 (UTC)

About the role of the sacristan in the Church

'LS

My name is Silouan and I`m the sacristan/ sacristain or churchward of our Parish in Holland. See our website: http://www.orthodox-amersfoort.nl/index.html If I`m not mistaken the greek word for it is neochoros. Till now I`ve been working with much love and pleasure and I thank God for granting me, for it is more than working! Personnaly spoken it is a matter of the heart, constantly being alert during the Holy Liturgy. But it`s not my intention to describe my experiences, not at all!

From october 2003 I stopped working, got my pre-pension and so I there is alot of time, surfing in Internet....But what is it all about? Well, maybe somebody can tell me more about the function of the sacristan, from churchhistory or there might be any books. Reading the lives the Saints, I met names of such a men or women.

Please forgive me, for my english is not perfect! So I `m very curious and hope to obtain more on this object. May God bless all of you, Silouan'

Suggested pages?

It'd might be nice to be able to suggest pages. I would suggest Word of God to address the phrase as it applies to Jesus (and the Bible?) --Ephilei 00:10, July 2, 2008 (UTC)

Check out OrthodoxWiki:Suggestions. —magda (talk) 22:23, July 2, 2008 (UTC)

Зошто не е опфатен празникот 28 август Голема Богородица?

Почитувани,

Сакав да дојдам до информација за утрешниот празник „Голема Богородица“, 28 август, меѓутоа најдов само статија за „Успетие на Богородица“, а не беа споеманти датуми и извадоци од познати фрески.

Јас не сум компетентен да уредувам страници, но си дозволувам да коментирам и да го барам она што не ми достасува како информација.

Со почит, Благој Јанешлиев

hi,

i was moved by your simplicity and youthful kindness - which also reflects very much between you and your lovely wife. I suggest you read The Philokalia. It is a compilation of texts from early Orthodox spiritual masters that have come to past between the 4th and 14th centuries. The Philokalia is the most venerated and read book after the Bible in the Orthodox tradition. Orthodoxy being eastern, focuses on the unification of subject and object - giving and giver - man and God. It also, unlike western traditions, focuses in the experiential quest for God, through the Jesus prayer.

Philokalia is Greek for love/friendship ie philo and beauty ie kalos; litteraly the love of beauty.

i wish you all the best - take care

yannis

Store?

What ever happened to the OrthodoxWiki store? Katjuscha 01:48, September 12, 2008 (UTC)

I dunno! I guess it was never used, so it must've expired! — FrJohn (talk)

Apophatic Theology

Hello,

I am a student attempting to do a paper on Apophatic Theology for my Philosophy of Religion and I was wondering if anyone had any sites or infomation where I could go to and gather more information for my paper.

Teresa

Personal tools
Variants
Actions
Navigation
interaction
Donate

Please consider supporting OrthodoxWiki. FAQs

Toolbox